As an example of the dreadful results of vaccination, even where
special care was taken, the following case from the Sixth Report of the Royal Commission
(p. 128) is worthy of earnest attention. It is the evidence of Dr. Thomas Skinner, of
Liverpool:

Q. 20,766. Will you give the Commission the particulars of the case
?A young lady, fifteen years of age, living at Grove Park, Liverpool, was
revaccinated by me at her fathers request, during an outbreak of small-pox in
Liverpool in 1865, as I had revaccinated all the girls in the Orphan Girls Asylum in
Myrtle Street, Liverpool (over 200 girls, I believe), and as the young ladys father
was chaplain to the asylum, he selected, and I approved of the selection, of a young girl,
the picture of health, and whose vaccine vesicle was matured, and as perfect in appearance
as it is possible to conceive. On the eighth day I took off the lymph in a capillary glass
tube, almost filling the tube with clear, transparent lymph. Next day, 7th March, 1865, I
revaccinated the young lady from this same tube, and from the same tube and at the same
time I revaccinated her mother and the cook. Before opening the tube I remember holding it
up to the light and requesting the mother to observe how perfectly clear and homogeneous,
like water, the lymph was, neither pus nor blood corpuscles were visible to the
naked eye. All three operations were successful, and on the eighth day all three vesicles
were matured "like a pearl upon a rose petal," as Jenner described a perfect
specimen. On that day, the eighth day after the operation, I visited my patient, and to
all appearance she was in the soundest health and spirits, with her usual bright eyes and
ruddy cheeks. Although I was much tempted to take the lymph from so healthy a vesicle and
subject, I did not do so, as I have frequently seen erysipelas and other bad consequences
follow the opening of a matured vesicle, As I did not open the vesicle that operation
could not be the cause of what followed.

Between the tenth and the eleventh day after the
revaccinationthat is, about three days after the vesicle had matured and begun to
scab overI was called in haste to my patient the young lady, whom I found, in one of
the most severe rigors I ever witnessed, such as generally precedes or ushers in surgical,
puerperal, and other forms of fever. This would be on the 18th March, 1865. Eight days
from the time of this rigor my patient was dead, and she died of the most frightful form
of blood poisoning that I ever witnessed, and I have been forty-five years in the active
practice of my profession. After the rigor, a low form of acute peritonitis set in, with
incessant vomiting and pain, which defied all means to allay. At last stercoraceous
vomiting, and cold, clammy, deadly sweats of a sickly odour set in, with pulselessness,
collapse, and death, which closed the terrible scene on the morning of the 26th March,
1865. Within twenty minutes of death rapid decomposition set in, and within two hours so
great was the bloated and discoloured condition of the whole body, more especially of the
head and face, that there was not a feature of this once lovely girl recognisable. Dr.
John Cameron, of 4, Rodney Street, Liverpool, physician to the Royal Southern Hospital at
Liverpool, met me daily in consultation while life lasted. I have a copy of the
certificate of death here.

Q. 20,767. To what do you attribute the death there ?I can
attribute the death there to nothing but vaccination.

In the same Report, fifteen medical men give evidence as to disease,
permanent injury, or death caused by vaccination. Two give evidence of syphilis and one of
leprosy as clearly due to vaccination. And, as an instance of how the law is applied in
the case of the poor, we have the story told by Mrs. Amelia Whiting (QQ.
21,43421,464). To put it in brief, it amounts to this :Mrs. Whiting lost a
child, after terrible suffering, from inflammation supervening upon
vaccination. The doctor s bill for the illness was £1 12s. 6d.; and a woman who came in
to help was paid 6s. After this first childs death, proceedings were taken for the
non-vaccination of another child; and though the case was explained in court, a fine of
one shilling was inflicted. And through it all, the husbands earnings as a labourer
were 11s..a week,